Weak Implicational Logics Related to the Lambek Calculus—Gentzen versus Hilbert Formalisms

2008 ◽  
pp. 201-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wojciech Zielonka
Keyword(s):  
Lambek Calculus ◽  
Implicational Logics

scholarly journals Involutive Nonassociative Lambek Calculus: Sequent Systems and Complexity

2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (1/2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wojciech Buszkowski
Keyword(s):  
Cut Elimination ◽  
Lambek Calculus ◽  
Double Negation ◽  
Sequent Systems ◽  
Sequent System

In [5] we study Nonassociative Lambek Calculus (NL) augmented with De Morgan negation, satisfying the double negation and contraposition laws. This logic, introduced by de Grooté and Lamarche [10], is called Classical Non-Associative Lambek Calculus (CNL). Here we study a weaker logic InNL, i.e. NL with two involutive negations. We present a one-sided sequent system for InNL, admitting cut elimination. We also prove that InNL is PTIME.

scholarly journals Undecidability of the Lambek Calculus with a Relevant Modality

2016 ◽  
pp. 240-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Kanovich ◽  
Stepan Kuznetsov ◽  
Andre Scedrov
Keyword(s):  
Lambek Calculus

Dyadic Modalities and Lambek Calculus

1993 ◽  
pp. 215-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Roorda
Keyword(s):  
Lambek Calculus

scholarly journals Correction to: Lambek Calculus with Conjugates

Studia Logica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Sedlár ◽  
Andrew Tedder
Keyword(s):  
Lambek Calculus

Relational semantics and a relational proof system for full Lambek calculus

1998 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 623-637 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy MacCaull
Keyword(s):  
Proof Theory ◽  
Kripke Semantics ◽  
Substructural Logic ◽  
Lambek Calculus ◽  
Relational Semantics ◽  
Complete Proof ◽  
Proof Search ◽  
Proof Tree ◽  
Relational Logic ◽  
Completeness Theorems

AbstractIn this paper we give relational semantics and an accompanying relational proof theory for full Lambek calculus (a sequent calculus which we denote by FL). We start with the Kripke semantics for FL as discussed in [11] and develop a second Kripke-style semantics, RelKripke semantics, as a bridge to relational semantics. The RelKripke semantics consists of a set with two distinguished elements, two ternary relations and a list of conditions on the relations. It is accompanied by a Kripke-style valuation system analogous to that in [11]. Soundness and completeness theorems with respect to FL hold for RelKripke models. Then, in the spirit of the work of Orlowska [14], [15], and Buszkowski and Orlowska [3], we develop relational logic RFL. The adjective relational is used to emphasize the fact that RFL has a semantics wherein formulas are interpreted as relations. We prove that a sequent Γ → α in FL is provable if and only if a translation, t(γ1 ● … ● γn ⊃ α)ευu, has a cut-complete fundamental proof tree. This result is constructive: that is, if a cut-complete proof tree for t(γ1 ● … ● γn ⊃ α)ευu is not fundamental, we can use the failed proof search to build a relational countermodel for t(γ1 ● … ● γn ⊃ α)ευu and from this, build a RelKripke countermodel for γ1 ● … ● γn ⊃ α. These results allow us to add FL, the basic substructural logic, to the list of those logics of importance in computer science with a relational proof theory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document